R. SIVAKUMAR Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, VIRUDHUNAGAR DISTRICT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is a resident of Mandapasalai, Aruppukkottai Taluk, Virudhunagar District. The fifth respondent constructed a building for the purpose of putting up a cracker shop. The petitioner's house is adjacent to the building of the fifth respondent and there are about ten houses situated near the fifth respondent's building. The fifth respondent blocked the canal in front of the building and the National Highway and disrupted the free flow of water. The same can cause disturbance to nearby houses during rainy season. Apart from this, a cell phone tower is also erected near the fifth respondent building. Therefore, if the cracker shop is allowed to be established in the proposed place, it will cause danger to the inhabitants. The petitioner conducted an agitation, in which, he was assaulted by the fifth respondent's men. An FIR in Crime No. 151 of 2016 was registered under Sections 294(b), 323, 355 and 506(i) of the Indian Penal Code. The Village Administrative Officer also is colluding with the fifth respondent and, therefore, the petitioner seeks a direction to the respondents 1 to 4 to consider his objections dated 20.10.2016 for opening the cracker shop at Survey No. 100/19, Mandapasalai Village, Aruppukkottai Taluk, Virudhunagar District.

(2.) The fifth respondent vehemently denied the contentions of the petitioner. According to him, the cracker shop is to be situated in Survey No. 100/19B and the same is not surrounded by any Cracker Shop, Crackers Factory or Explosives Godown within the radius of 15 metres. The only one residential house that of one Marichamy is at the distance of 60 metres. The distance between the pucca building put up by the fifth respondent and the National Highway between Aruppukkottai and Sayalkudi is at a distance of 10 metres. Between the proposed place and the National Highway, there is pathway to drain the rain water and there are no Temples, Mosques and burial ground or ancient monuments around the building constructed by the fifth respondent. Therefore, there is no impediment to grant licence. The licence is not granted only due to the pendency of the above Writ Petition. Hence, he seeks dismissal of the same.

(3.) I have considered the rival submissions.